Thats honestly the reason why most stuff is a web app these days. For desktop software you need to deal with IT security losers who recoil in horror at the idea of computers running software, and god help you if you need a port opened.
Far better to shove everything through port 443 and redownload the software over and over until the end of time.
As an IT security loser it’s not your software I’m worried about, it’s your OpSec. I’ve seen enough innocuous software being owned and being used to deploy malware that it takes a lot of due diligence to trust providers of random binaries
For tools devs use, performance is important, so we will do anything and everything we can to squeeze out those few extra seconds of delay, they all add up.
For tools users use, developer experience is important, so they get whatever React and Electron slop we hurl over the fence.
It's also just kinda bad. Like, people were celebrating the has() pseudo class allowing them to do things with selectors that would be trivial in XPath in its first version 20 years previously.
I will give the people who work on CSS props though, they are the only ones interested in advancing browser's capabilities as something more than just a JS runtime, that is to be commended.
I imagine it's a difficult language to ride the saddle-point of capability and performance. A declarative language like that seems like it'd be easy to design a feature that, as a side-effect of existing at all, slows rendering globally by 5%.
IMO, browsers should throw their hands up and say "if the developers want to do that, it's not our problem" more often. The argument that people would migrate to some browser with a faster CSS engine is a bad one for the cases where it's impossible to handle bad code with good performance.
There are too many good features that aren't being added to CSS because browsers don't want to slow down on bad sites.
If a feature can't be used without the site using it becoming one of those bad sites then it's not very useful (that was absolutely the case with `:has` until the Safari team figured out a trick to implement it performantly - after which the other browser promptly adopted the same trick and implemented the feature).
You've always been able to do it, doesn't even need to be HTML, serialise as XHTML and you can include the tags on your own namespace and have separate CSS for them.
If the Covid lockdowns taught us anything, its that a colossal number of people would happily subject tens of thousands of people to easily preventable deaths if it meant they could get Applebees for dinner. Besides that, huge numbers of people join the military precisely because they value a Muslim foreigners life as being worth less than a joke degree from some no name college.
So long as there is a bare minimum amount of indirection, they happily do it.
Good. Cars only exist as a viableeans of transport due to vast subsidies and a total reorganization of society to suit them. Motorists should pay the cost of this absurd status quo.
For every one who is excited about using AI like an incredibly expensive and wasteful auto complete, there are a hundred who are excited about inflicting AI on other people.
> Where does the organisation intend to draw the line?
The answer to this question is always "somewhere". Just because I can't proclaim an exact number of trees that constitute a forest doesn't mean the concept doesn't exist.
No, but it becomes a dubious concept when you define forests as a collection of only conifer trees and that deciduous trees don't count for the definition of a forest.
If you look at daytime TV in the UK, there are a lot of ads targeting the elderly talking about funeral cover and life assurance and so on.
I for one cannot wait for a future where grandparents get targeted ads showing their grandchildren, urging them to buy some product or service so their loved ones have something to remember them by...
Far better to shove everything through port 443 and redownload the software over and over until the end of time.
reply